SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The time has come for Apple to pay for the infamous Error 53 that bricked iPhones and iPads taken to a third party for repairs.
The Federal Court of Australia announced Monday its order for Apple to pay AU$9 million (around US $6.8 million converted) for telling customers who encountered the error they weren't entitled to a refund.
The error was first reported in 2016. If you fixed a cracked screen or a failing Touch ID-enabled home button through a third party not licensed by Apple, "security checks" would render your iPhone or iPad unusable, showing only the message "Error 53".
Apple explained the message as a security measure to protect the iPhone's fingerprint sensor from exploitation. It released an iOS 9.2.1 update later that February to restore bricked devices, but reports showed it did not re-enable Touch ID and customers complained they still lost photos, documents and apps.
In April 2017, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) commenced a legal battle with Apple in the Federal Court of Australia. It said Apple violated customers' rights under Australian Consumer Law to repairs for devices bricked by Error 53.
Then, in June 2017, the ACCC conducted an undercover operation involving 13 calls with Apple retailers in Australia, in which Apple representatives allegedly said Apple did not have responsibility to remedy faulty iPhones repaired by an unauthorised third party.
Apple has since admitted that from February 2015 to February 2016, its US website and Apple staff in Australian stores and on customer service phone calls said to 275 Australian customers affected by Error 53 it wasn't responsible for a remedy.
But according to Australian Consumer Law, that's not on.
(Score: 3, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Thursday June 21 2018, @10:49AM (1 child)
Damn right. We should have the right to fix our own tractors and cars, use whatever 3rd party ink vendor we like for ink jet printers, buy generic drugs, and of course, control our own smart phones. Remember when Keurig tried DRM on coffee?
Those industries that run propaganda campaigns to terrorize the public, stuff like Big Pharma hinting that Canadian drugs might not be safe, and printer manufacturers saying that off brand ink might damage your printer, ought to be sued massively for slander and libel and perhaps racketeering as well.
I've also encountered the fake warranty. One scurvy trick is saying that the warranty coves only parts, not labor. Another is that repairs must be done at approved shops that of course charge much more money for labor. The warranty is so bad it's cheaper to just buy another than try to use the warranty. Might as well not be covered. LG pulled that one on me. What I actually did was buy the parts and replace them myself. It was by far the least costly option though it did cost me a Saturday morning of my time.
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Friday June 22 2018, @12:54AM
If it costs more to repair an item in warranty than replace it, the ACCC will rip that company a new one. Typically this results in the consumer being given a new replacement free of charge.